Why versioning went full retard these days? Also, what the last

Something doesn't get shit om a specific version number
but at an age of 1 year

http://semver.org/

>>57252294
>2.9 < 2.10
for what purpose

>>57252880
2.9.0 < 2.10.0

2.9.0 > 2.1.0

My last job had to follow a bunch of really fucking stupid rules for versioning because of PCI compliance
So we decided "Alright, we'll use v5 for PCI, next digit will be major features, and the last digit will be odd for internal builds"
And because we released internal builds so fucking much we'd go from 5.1.4 on the site to 5.1.36
Confused the hell out of everybody

>>57252880
Versioning isn't decimal you fucking autist

>>57253010
How it's not decimal if 10 goes after 9? It's not like A goes after 9.

>>57252880
10 is a larger number than 9

>>57253049
>It's not like A goes after 9.
In number systems larger than base-10 it does.

>>57253054
It is

>>57253059
It is

The point is >>57253010 versioning isn't decimal, but I've never seen 2.A version after 2.9

>>57253123
No, the point is that 2.10 does not represent a single number, it represents 2 as a major version and 10 as a minor version, separated by a '.' character.

Chrome fucked us and I'm still mad. I want my firefox at like version 6.47 instead every time these faggots release a minor update they decide to bump it up +1.0.0 so they don't get cucked by google while simultaneously getting cucked by google.

>>57253151
But we had, let's say, IE 5.5
It feels like it wasn't already 5.0, but it wasn't 6.0 yet
What's wrong with this?

>>57253211
Not all software developers use the same versioning standards. Microsoft's versioning was different back then.

>>57253222
But still, major.minor versioning is pretty universal, isn't it?